HDEO - the 'poor man's syn' - myth or fact?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
16,038
Location
Canada
Oddball question, but am going to ask it anyway.

A while ago, say mid-1970's to late 1980's, synthetic oils were on the market, and were available, but they were fairly expensive and could be hard to find.

Traditional conventional oils weren't really any hot shakes, so they had problems lasting beyond, say, 5k. The synthetics could do it easily, but as stated, expensive and could be hard to find.

Somewhere along the line, the idea came out that HDEO engine oils could be used as an alternative to get longer drain intervals in gasoline engines. Somebody being 'clever' could buy a HDEO, with its higher additive levels, and go, say, 6k on a drain instead of the standard 3k.

Since fleet or HDEO were not much more expensive than a regular PCMO, they could be treated as the 'poor mans synthetic'.

Here is my somewhat awkward question: Was this a real term or idea that was developed and followed, OR is it just an 'urban myth' that people did this, and the term was coined much later?

Were there articles suggesting people could do this, and did many people actually do it? Have you, or anyone you know, deliberately bought and used HDEO to get extended drains instead of springing for full synthetic oil?

These days, the concept is almost pointless, as with the proliferation of cheaper group III base oils, and most oil companies having a syn oil, they are easy to get at reasonable cost. Also, most cars take a thinner oil than the 15W-40 or 10W-30 that an HDEO is.

Anybody have any anecdotes or thoughts on this?
 
The HDEO has more additives, so you can go longer OCI I'd think. But I'd think the cheap basestock would cook down and sludge up just like PCMO, so you still couldn't go too long.
 
HM oils have 15% - 20% more additives than regular passenger motor oils and would likely fill the bill for most maintenance minded consumers.
 
I can't speak to the "poor man's syn" moniker, but at that time period if you could get a HDEO 10w-30 dual rated for the same price as a standard PCMO 10w-30, I think it'd be a good idea. A more additized "heavy duty" oil vs. a less robust oil. I've always used HDEO for lawn equipment and small engines even if they just specify any old PCMO.
49.gif
 
Last edited:
Higher tbn and more shear stable viis were the thought process basis. True or not? Dunno..
 
A HDEO that is spec'ced for use with turbocharged engines should fit the bill for any normally experienced heat of a non turbo gas engine.

A synthetic will provide more moments of protection with a coolant failure, but any overheating event's outcome is an individual situation.
 
Hi,
addyguy - I commenced using HDEOs (HD oils) in petrol engines in the late 1950s due to their reliable quality and performance in testing. Previously I had been well educated on Castrol & Caltex non HD products of the time.

Into later years I never thought of HDEOs as a "poor mans synthetic" - just a more reliable and progressive products due to the increased quality factor

In the very early 1960s I had a unique opportunity to compare Shell, Caltex, Castrol & Mobil HDEOs operating under severe service in a range of heavy diesel engines. This was in high altitude low temperature and very heavy load/use conditions

This was further enhanced for me when living in Denmark in the 1960s and working for Caltex-Chevron - by VW, Porsche and MB specifying HD lubricants. I also learnt a lot by my involvement with MB and Porsche and later employment with MB. Also, CAT in the late 1950s/1960s had their Series 3 Spec, and the MiL requirements indicated that these HD lubricants were also great performers in petrol engines.

This was borne out by my own tear down inspections. This, after previously seeing many sludged/dirty engines of the 1950s caused by some of the variable quality lubricants of that era

Of course when the API was woken up by the OEMs in the 1970s-1980s and ACEA was formed PCMOs progressively became viable again

I still use HDEOs in my engines - and always used them in my BMW, Porsche and Benz vehicles of the past

Modern synthetics are wonderful products of our time and cost effective when used correctly. I've never been a fan of Boutique lubricants - the Majors make a great range of reliable quality products
 
Last edited:
After reading this thread I feel as if I were hip before being hip were hip. In my mixed fleet we have always used HDEO in everything, and have since the early '70's. Flathead Chryslers & Fords and all of the other gasoline powered equipment. If nothing else it was originally done out of convenience since we have always had our oil delivered in 55 gallon drum, which was dual rated.

Currently everything still gets HDEO except the newer cars which get the speced 5w-20.
 
When one can buy a jug of T6 (just a mere group 3) for 19 bucks at Wally World why speculate over lesser substitutes. Penny wise.....
 
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
When one can buy a jug of T6 (just a mere group 3) for 19 bucks at Wally World why speculate over lesser substitutes. Penny wise.....


And a $5 rebate on top of that
smile.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary


I still use HDEOs in my engines - and always used them in my BMW, Porsche and Benz vehicles of the past

Modern synthetics are wonderful products of our time and cost effective when used correctly. I've never been a fan of Boutique lubricants - the Majors make a great range of reliable quality products


To the younger BITOG members, you guys can learn a lot by paying attention to what the real gray beards on this board run in their own fleets.
 
Last edited:
Often the older oils were also diesel approved. I can't remember how many vintage Quaker State green cans that said "SF/CD" or "SE/CC" and had a 10w40 viscosity.

Later, it seemed that most gasoline engine oils either had no diesel rating, or they only met API CF and the newest API spec. They continued long after API CG was created. At that point, API CG and CH must have been so much tougher to pass than engines used in gasoline engines.

Sure, diesel engine oils were built for turbocharged engines. However, a turbocharged diesel engine never reaches the temperatures of the turbocharged gasoline engines.
 
Artificialist, I think that's when we started to see the HTHS of 10w-30 grades drop for fuel economy purposes. I know my old F-150 has some strange, convoluted warning about what to use and what to avoid, with mentions of dual ratings. I'll have to take a picture and post it one of these days.
 
Sorry I never got back to this thread...but thanks for the interesting info in here.

Artificialist, you are right - I've been suprised about how many older oils had dual ratings on them - I have an early 80's cardboard Gulf 10w-30 can, and it is 'SF/CC', so you are right, early ratings didn't do much to separate HD ratings from gas ones until later.

Another thing I have read is a 1960's issue of Popular Mechanics (1966, I think) that has an article on choosing oils...some here may have seen it. Ray Potter from Ford recommends all people use oil rated 'MS', or 'Motor Severe', which was the heaviest-duty rating you could get at the time.
 
Originally Posted By: addyguy

Another thing I have read is a 1960's issue of Popular Mechanics (1966, I think) that has an article on choosing oils...some here may have seen it. Ray Potter from Ford recommends all people use oil rated 'MS', or 'Motor Severe', which was the heaviest-duty rating you could get at the time.

The MS classification transformed to SC around 1968, prior to that the HD oils were often rated MS/DG(Diesel General)... Info on net makes it sound as if MS didn't exist before approx 1963, but I remember my dad talking about using MS oil in our '55 Chevy... That was in late '50s when we still lived in WV, moved to VA in '61...
 
Originally Posted By: addyguy
Artificialist, you are right - I've been suprised about how many older oils had dual ratings on them - I have an early 80's cardboard Gulf 10w-30 can, and it is 'SF/CC', so you are right, early ratings didn't do much to separate HD ratings from gas ones until later.

I mentioned in a thread the past day or so about how Shell Rotella stuff and PCMO did have a bit more of an overlap than they do know, back in the day. With no ILSAC ratings, it certainly was more common to see things like SF/CC, even marketed as Rotella in a 30 grade, as opposed to us seeing it as CJ-4/SM today or something similar.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top